How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales
Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current pap...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of environmental research and public health 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 17 |
container_start_page | 10816 |
container_title | International journal of environmental research and public health |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Maes, Marlies Qualter, Pamela Lodder, Gerine M A Mund, Marcus |
description | Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/ijerph191710816 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9518421</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2712852836</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUtLxDAUhYMoPkbX7iTgRhejuUmbhwtBBl8wPlBnHdJ663RomzFpFf-9FXUYXd0L97uHcziE7AI7EsKw43KGYT4FAwqYBrlCNkFKNkwkg9WlfYNsxThjTOhEmnWyISRTOk3YJrm_8u_04Na3h7T19AZd7ALSsW-wKhuM8YSe0Qd8K_Gd-oK2U6Tn5cu0pTc-tnTk69o31QedRHymj7mrMG6TtcJVEXd-5oBMLs6fRlfD8d3l9ehsPMwTlbZDxUFLrhw6obhIedobyjKW5U6BTlnhmEqERDTCGEhlUgAHzGRhjGKJNkoMyOm37rzLanzOsWmDq-w8lLULH9a70v69NOXUvvg3a1LQCYde4OBHIPjXDmNr6zLmWFWuQd9FyxVwnXItZI_u_0NnvgtNH--LAm4ApOmp428qDz7GgMXCDDD71Zb911b_sbecYcH_1iM-Abeojqg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2711291169</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</creator><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><description>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-7827</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710816</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36078540</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Educational Status ; Loneliness ; Loneliness - psychology ; Mental health ; Meta-analysis ; Psychometrics ; Quantitative psychology ; Questionnaires ; Reproducibility of Results ; Review ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1710-5728 ; 0000-0001-6114-3820 ; 0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9518421/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9518421/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36078540$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qualter, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lodder, Gerine M A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><title>International journal of environmental research and public health</title><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><description>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</description><subject>Educational Status</subject><subject>Loneliness</subject><subject>Loneliness - psychology</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><issn>1660-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkUtLxDAUhYMoPkbX7iTgRhejuUmbhwtBBl8wPlBnHdJ663RomzFpFf-9FXUYXd0L97uHcziE7AI7EsKw43KGYT4FAwqYBrlCNkFKNkwkg9WlfYNsxThjTOhEmnWyISRTOk3YJrm_8u_04Na3h7T19AZd7ALSsW-wKhuM8YSe0Qd8K_Gd-oK2U6Tn5cu0pTc-tnTk69o31QedRHymj7mrMG6TtcJVEXd-5oBMLs6fRlfD8d3l9ehsPMwTlbZDxUFLrhw6obhIedobyjKW5U6BTlnhmEqERDTCGEhlUgAHzGRhjGKJNkoMyOm37rzLanzOsWmDq-w8lLULH9a70v69NOXUvvg3a1LQCYde4OBHIPjXDmNr6zLmWFWuQd9FyxVwnXItZI_u_0NnvgtNH--LAm4ApOmp428qDz7GgMXCDDD71Zb911b_sbecYcH_1iM-Abeojqg</recordid><startdate>20220830</startdate><enddate>20220830</enddate><creator>Maes, Marlies</creator><creator>Qualter, Pamela</creator><creator>Lodder, Gerine M A</creator><creator>Mund, Marcus</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-5728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6114-3820</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220830</creationdate><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><author>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Educational Status</topic><topic>Loneliness</topic><topic>Loneliness - psychology</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qualter, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lodder, Gerine M A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maes, Marlies</au><au>Qualter, Pamela</au><au>Lodder, Gerine M A</au><au>Mund, Marcus</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</atitle><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><date>2022-08-30</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>17</issue><spage>10816</spage><pages>10816-</pages><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><eissn>1660-4601</eissn><abstract>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>36078540</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijerph191710816</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-5728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6114-3820</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1660-4601 |
ispartof | International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816 |
issn | 1660-4601 1661-7827 1660-4601 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9518421 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Educational Status Loneliness Loneliness - psychology Mental health Meta-analysis Psychometrics Quantitative psychology Questionnaires Reproducibility of Results Review Surveys and Questionnaires |
title | How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-15T23%3A06%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20(Not)%20to%20Measure%20Loneliness:%20A%20Review%20of%20the%20Eight%20Most%20Commonly%20Used%20Scales&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20environmental%20research%20and%20public%20health&rft.au=Maes,%20Marlies&rft.date=2022-08-30&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=17&rft.spage=10816&rft.pages=10816-&rft.issn=1660-4601&rft.eissn=1660-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijerph191710816&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2712852836%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2711291169&rft_id=info:pmid/36078540&rfr_iscdi=true |